Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

2009 Toyota Corolla

1495052545562

Comments

  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    It might be too late now, depending on the terms of the agreement you signed, but anyway... when you want a car that is not yet at the dealer, make sure the agreement you sign has a clause that says something to the effect that your final acceptance of the car is contingent on your inspection and test drive of that car when it arrives. Then if there is anything amiss, e.g. damage in transit or maybe some crappy tires that you just can't stand ;) you have the right to reject the car and get your deposit back. (Of course, the dealer can offer to do something to make the car acceptable to you--whatever that might be.) The other suggestion is, for any deposit you make on the car, put it on a credit card. That way if there is any dispute about the delivery of the car, you can have the credit card company investigate it on your behalf. And in my experience, some dealers don't even run the credit card when the deposit is on a card, so you aren't out any money until you actually take delivery.

    If the dealer won't do a direct swap of the tires (e.g. maybe they don't have the ones you want in stock), maybe you could ask them what kind of credit they would give you for the four Turanza OEM tires. Then you could go out and get the replacement tires yourself at a tire shop (probably at a much lower price than what the dealer would charge for them), get the credit for the OEM tires from the dealer, and if you ask real nice maybe they'd put the new tires on for you at delivery. And if that doesn't work, you could go to a tire shop and ask them what kind of trade in they'd give you for four Turanza EL 400s with a handful of miles on them.
  • bob191bob191 Member Posts: 14
    Thanks a lot backy for your helpful advice.
    bob.
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    Its kinda funny because about 1year ago (Message 831), I predicted Toyota would use the 2.4.

    That's why I'm disappointed that Toyota didn't offer the 3ZR-FAE Valvematic engine rated at around 155 bhp on the new Corolla models in the USA. With this engine and a new 5AT transmission, the new Corolla could have been a SERIOUS contender against the Honda Civic EX sedan.
  • mackabeemackabee Member Posts: 4,709
    Serious contender? Heck, the Corolla outsell the Civic. So who is the contender?
    Mack
  • bob191bob191 Member Posts: 14
    what do you think of BRIDGESTONE TURANZA EL 400. All info I have is from Tire rack.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I have no idea. What did the dealer say about swapping them out for a different tire?
  • bob191bob191 Member Posts: 14
    I haven't heared from the general manager yet, but the salesperson in regards to the type of tires used on the Sport model just roll me back to Toyota main office and "advised" me to discuss my concerns with the product that came from the factory. For upgrading they will charge $140.00/each.

    He is not sure how that would be handled and advised talk to the Parts/Service manager or sell OEM tires on- line. Actually, I would call it upgrading in quality, but not in price. According to my servey Turanza EL 400 cost $10.00 more than Michellin Primacy MXV4 and $23.00 more than Michelin Harmony/each. Today I sent e-mail to the General Manager and waiting for his responce.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    You might start checking on Plan B (or was it C), that is, talk to tire shops in your area such as Discount Tire and see what kind of trade-in they would give you for nearly brand-new tires. Since there is little difference in price, that would be a lot cheaper than what the Toyota dealer would charge you.
  • mackabeemackabee Member Posts: 4,709
    Bob, you might have to call 1-800-gotoyota and file a case. Just tell them all you want is better tires than the ones on the car. They will call the dealership's customer relations manager and they will take care of it. It shouldn't get to that point if you bought the car from a good dealership. The salesperson should have taken care of this already. Maybe he's afraid of the general manager.
    \Mack.
  • mackabeemackabee Member Posts: 4,709
    I have to give credit to jaxs and backy. I sold a Hyundai Santa Fe today since we also have a Hyundai dealership and I can cross sell. I took one of previous customers there as the new Highlander is too big for her. She wanted something comparable in size to her old Highlander. I suggested the RAV4 but she thought it was too small. She told me she wanted to look at a few other cars and I asked which ones? So when she said the Santa Fe and Veracruz I offered to take her to our Hyndai store to take a look and a test drive. We were there for quite sometime as she couldn't make up her mind between either one. While I was there I checked out their line of cars and I came away very impressed. Toyota better wake up to the quality issues or Hyundai will be eating their lunch.
    I looked at the Elantra and was amazed at all the options and standard equipment you get for thousands less than the Corolla.
    I drove a Sonata today to go back to the Toyota store and it felt like a cross between an Accord and a Camry but with better interior materials. The engine was not as smooth as the Camry but I could live with it.
    The Veracruz blew me away! Double stitching on the leather seats, vents all the way around for passengers, etc,
    The Santa Fe also impressed me and I would probably take either of those two over a RAV4 or Highlander.
    The prices blew me away also and they have some pretty hefty rebates to go along.
    I ended up selling her a Santa Fe which was $31,919 or so less the discount and less rebate came out to $27,400.00 plus ttl. She could have had the Veracruz for $77 more. I would have taken the Veracruz. They were both 07 models but since she's keeping the vehicle until the wheels fall off she was very happy with it. If this keeps up I might be selling Hyundai vehicles soon.
    Mack
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I appreciate your forthrightness. Now maybe you can understand my disappointment with some aspects of the new Corolla. And why I believe that Toyota will get away with their de-contenting for awhile, but eventually more buyers (like the lady you sold the Santa Fe to) will see that there are other alternatives out there. It's a tough market out there. Fuel economy and reliability are a strong combination, but not unique.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    So what if it outsells? It still not a better overall car than the civic. The corolla is cheap but it has MANY really cheap pieces that I don't like on it.

    Personally, both are great cars but neither would get my money.
    -Cj
  • sandman46sandman46 Member Posts: 1,798
    Has this problem been addressed on the Corolla and the Camry yet? We've had 2 Camry's & 2 Corolla's with these horrible mushy brakes with too much dead pedal that actually drove us away from the Toyota brand. A shame too as we really liked the cars but hated the brakes.
    Has this problem ever been corrected yet?

    The Sandman :confuse:
  • mackabeemackabee Member Posts: 4,709
    It's only a problem if you think it's a problem. I've had 4 Camrys and 2 Corollas and the brakes "mushiness" doesn't bother me a bit.
    Mack
  • sandman46sandman46 Member Posts: 1,798
    Your answer makes no sense...only a problem if I think it's a problem. Our Nissan's didn't have that problem, nor do our current Honda or Mazda. Even our GM products from the '70's and '80's didn't have mushy brakes.
    With an answer like that, I doubt we'll be looking at the Corolla when we need to buy two cars within the next year. And people let you get away with answers like that? Sheesh!

    The Sandman :confuse:
  • jacksan1jacksan1 Member Posts: 504
    I think the question really is: Does the car stop within a reasonable distance despite the mush feel? My Subaru Forester has a pretty mushy brake feel if compared to a lot of other cars, but the thing stops just fine. So I think that where I would focus my attention.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Also...while most car mags note the mushy feel of the brakes in Toyotas, they go on to say something like "despite the mushiness, the car had a surprisingly short stopping distance, besting all the other cars in the comparo", LOL.

    The feel of the pedal in Toyotas may suck, but it's usually Honda, believe it or not, with the worst stopping distances.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • windjammerwindjammer Member Posts: 25
    I doubt we'll be looking at the Corolla when we need to buy two cars within the next year. And people let you get away with answers like that? Sheesh!

    Dumbest post I have seen on this forum He's a Salesmen Dude! Not a spokesperson or a engineer for Toyota
  • mackabeemackabee Member Posts: 4,709
    Being a salesman has nothing to do with it Dude! I own three Camrys right now and one before that was totalled. The brakes on most Toyotas are "mushy" but they do the job better than other brands. It is not a defect or problem. You just have to get used to them like everything else.
    Mack :blush:
  • sandman46sandman46 Member Posts: 1,798
    I know he's a salesman dude! He usually has good product knowledge and was looking for something positive about Toyota brakes. He knows a lot and really looking for positive info before I put my kids in a car I wouldn't drive myself. I go by pedal feel dude, and all our recent cars have had better pedal feel with better stopping power...that's all I care about when I put my loved ones in a car.
    Why on earth has Edmunds gotten so nasty lately...never was this way in the old days. But I guess the internet lets jerky folks say stuff that most won't say face to face. Unbelievable!
    Guess it's definitely time to look else where for a nicer exchange of ideas.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    Let's dispense with the personal comments. You don't have to like everything everyone posts, but there is no need to take anything or make anything personal.
  • mcdawggmcdawgg Member Posts: 1,722
    Completely agree - it is not the feel, it is the actual stopping distance that counts.
  • cz75cz75 Member Posts: 210
    No reality check required - the Corolla XRS needs to lose $2000 on price when compared to a Civic Si. They aren't even in the same league. A loaded Mazda3 is more in line with what the Corolla has to offer and it should still be cheaper despite having more content. A Corolla XLE is also notably inferior in features to a Civic EX, yet costs more money for similar content (around $500) and still comes with rear drums and a non-independent rear suspension and less power and only a four speed auto, with the only advantage being optional traction and stability control.
  • cz75cz75 Member Posts: 210
    The latest issue of Car and Driver seems to indicate stopping distance is inferior too.
  • cz75cz75 Member Posts: 210
    Toyota usually does better with their brakes than Honda, except on the Corolla, which has for as long as I can remember had the worst, or nearly so, stopping distances in its class. One year, it was the had the worst brakes of any vehicle tested in Road & Track, worse even than most SUVs, but that had to be at least 5 years ago. You can usually blame Honda's poor braking on the tires offered.
  • cz75cz75 Member Posts: 210
    And also what are the final drive ratios? You can't just look at torque.

    Honda is ready with A-VTEC when Toyota comes out with Valvematic, but odds are good Honda will offer theirs first.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    The XRS is NOT a competitor to the Si. Thus the price difference between the two doesn't matter one single whit. The XRS supports the Camry line..nothing else. It's not a boy-racer vehicle, the Si and Mazda3 have that small segment all to themselves.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    After reading the 8-car comparo in my latest issue of C&D, I see that you are right on the money: Corolla is almost LAST in braking, with a dismal 193 feet needed to stop from 70 mph. The only car in the whole test that is worse in braking is the new Focus.

    Substantially BETTER than Corolla in braking are Rabbit, SX4 Sport, Toyota Corp's own Scion xD, Astra XR, and Lancer GTS, with the xD leading the pack. It also has the weight advantage in this group, which I am sure contributes to its great braking.

    Unfortunately, after falling to third in a previous comparo, the Civic was not included in the group. I bet it would have had crappy braking performance too.

    Apart from that, the Corolla got pretty good overall marks in the test, ranking third and almost tied for second with the new Impreza. And it did lead the group in fuel economy, using 14% less gas than the group average. The reviewers REALLY disliked the xD and the Focus.

    Edit....just looked up the Civic's braking performance on C&D's website, and it is as I thought - crappy. 191 feet, very similar to the Corolla's results in this month's comparo.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Nippon - note, too, that braking distance can easily be affected by tire choice.

    I thought the C/D comparison was an interesting one, though its obvious that comparable trim levels are becoming increasingly difficult for the magazines to find in the Press Fleets of the manufacturers, as evidenced by this very basic Corolla Standard entry.

    I think perhaps a more appropriate competitor (features-wise, I recognize there are no engine or suspension differences) would have been a Corolla S 5MT with VSC, which would have offered 16-inch wheels and tires, and I wonder how that would have impacted braking distance and adhesion measures. I don't think a Corolla S would have changed the vehicle's 3rd of 8 ranking, overall, I'm just interested on how tires affect these two items.

    Also, it will be interesting to see the braking distances of the Corolla LE 4A that Consumer Reports is currently testing.

    http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/news/2008/04/2009-toyota-coroll- - a-first-drive-4-08/overview/toyota-corolla-first-drive.htm

    just $.02
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Yes absolutely, tire choice is a big part of it, but of course most car buyers are not going to want to immediately go out and replace brand new tires with a better brand or bigger tire. Which means that for at least 40K miles or so, you will be stuck with that crappy braking the article mentioned.

    I, like you, took note of the fact that the Corolla was one of the cheapest cars in the test, in large part because they had gotten a stripped base model rather than higher-trim versions as they had with most of the other models in the test.

    The Civic I mentioned that needed 191 feet to stop from 70 was the LX, so it has the larger 205 mm tires that upper-trim Civics (excepting SI) have. While the wider tires of a Corolla S may have improved stopping distances for the current C&D comparo, its value quotient would have dropped in the rankings due to higher price with little in the way of additional substantive equipment, and of course plenty of people in the real world will have to live with the smaller tires of the lesser-trim Corollas. It is worth mentioning that if you're not buying a hybrid or a Lexus, the factory tires on brand new Toyotas these days are getting cheaper and cheaper, another cost-cutting move that is beginning to stand out.

    I would say that given the prices of the '09s, the only ones that are a good value are the stripped models. I do remember thinking that for $16K sticker (and therefore $14-15K real world price before too much longer, if not already), it was decently equipped given the standard safety equipment. The $20K XLEs and S's, by contrast, seem less of a bargain - very little beyond plastic tack-ons is added for the price, cruise is still optional all the way up the range, as is keyless entry in some cases, and the 1.8 auto is still a 4-speed. For a sticker of $20K, there are way better options.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    I agree on the most part.

    However, you state "While the wider tires of a Corolla S may have improved stopping distances for the current C&D comparo, its value quotient would have dropped in the rankings due to higher price with little in the way of additional substantive equipment, and of course plenty of people in the real world will have to live with the smaller tires of the lesser-trim Corollas. "

    Your statement regarding value quotient makes some assumptions, as your definition of "substative" may differ from that of the the editors at C/D. My personal feeling is that had C/D tested a Corolla S 5MT with a middle-of -the road option package and VSC (at about $18,500), both the Features and Pricing scoring categories would have been adjusted accordingly, and therefore not resulted in a different overall ranking for the vehicle. Certainly, the Corolla, like many Toyotas and vehicles from other manufacturers, can become pricey with options, so I def. hear you on that.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I thought the comparo was odd from a number of perspectives. The oddest thing was that the cover of the magazine touts the comparo in terms of MPG. So, which two cars come out 1 and 2? The Rabbit and Impreza, which have the lowest fuel economy in the group (or very close to it). It's clear C/D was interested mainly in which car had the sportiest handling, as is their norm. Everything else, from fuel economy to how roomy the back seat is (and how accessible it is, in the case of the Rabbit) took lower priority.

    So they might as well have included a MINI Cooper in the comparo, which would have given them the high fuel economy plus crisp handling, for about the same price as some other cars that were tested.

    Including a Corolla S in the comparo makes so much sense, I expect what happened is that Toyota could not provide one from their test fleet when C/D wanted it.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Good points, esp. re: the MINI, which starts at $18K, and fuel economy.

    I agree, also, on your assertion regarding the Corolla S - it seems that any press reviews of the Corolla S I've read (such as the Edmunds.com example), have been of full-dress, leather/NAV models, which would have been up above the 20K mark. That said, I can configure Corolla S 5MT with VSC, Pwr Pkg, heated mirrors, 6 CD, cruise, mats (but no alloys or spoiler) for $18,465 in my region.

    IMO, the print mags are in a tough spot nowadays, both from the perspective of available fleets, but moreso, increasing time irrelevance... even though we receive May issues of C/D, MT, R&T, etc.. the last week in March, theres nothing we really haven't read on the internet already.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    There were some other interesting tidbits in the C/D review, e.g.:

    * The editors raved about how nice the Impreza's interior is and how mundane (but functional) the Corolla's is, yet they gave the Corolla more points on the interior than the Impreza.

    * There was a lot of emphasis on making the 2009 Corolla quiet, but according to C/D's measurments the Corolla wasn't the quietest at idle, full throttle, or 70 mph cruise. I don't have the mag in front of me, but if I recall there were 2-3 cars ahead of the Corolla in some if not all 3 categories. Even though it's hard to tell a difference of a few decibels with the human ear, it was surprising to me that the new Corolla wasn't the quietest in the group.

    * They apparently had no problem fitting even their 6'5" tester in the Corolla's back seat (they mentioned only that the front seat was tight for one of their tall testers). That amazes me, since I'm only 5'10" and felt cramped sitting behind myself.
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    What I find interesting was last year when Motor Trend did its comparison test that included the Honda Civic LX sedan, Nisssan Sentra 2.0 S sedan, and the previous-generation Corolla LE sedan (all fitted with the available automatic transmission), both the Civic and Sentra far out-pointed the Corolla. It appears the new Corolla is still not much better.

    That's why I'm really hoping that the Corolla gets the 3ZR-FAE Valvematic engine within the next 18 months mated to a 5AT transmission along with standard four-wheel disc brakes on their top-line model.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Those changes would not have materially affected the Corolla's score in the C/D comparo. As it is, the Corolla was only 1 point behind the Rabbit in Powertrain, and the Rabbit got the top score in that category. And there was no score (amazingly I think) for braking distance, although the Corolla was 2 points behind the best in the group on brake feel. So it might have picked up 2-3 points with a better engine and brakes, enough to slip into 2nd over the Impreza, but it was 19 points behind the Rabbit. At best, the Corolla would extend its very slim margin over the Astra (one point) and Lancer (2 points).
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Also note that since we're talking about Car and Driver, the last-generation Corolla placed ahead of the new generation Sentra in last year's test of compact vehicles.

    While I don't mind reading MT, I'd rather take C/D, which mixes subjective and objective measures and at least attempts a rational conversion into metrics (via its socring table), than MT which basically doesn't explain at all how they arrive at rankings.

    Backy, I think what you've stated regarding sound is interesting, but not all that uncommon. The decibel measures of sound do not account for sound quality, and that may have influenced C/D's comments to some degree. For ex, I've read in a few places that the 1.8L in the Corolla is less "boomy" than in the past - a good thing. And honestly, even though theres a Subie in my family, you've got to be a fan to *like* how that engine sounds, especially with its Mack truck idle.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I know what you're saying. I guess I just expected more of a difference in measured noise levels, given the emphasis on making the new Corolla very quiet.

    But then, C/D apparently doesn't care too much about how quiet a car is, if it handles well. They knocked the top two cars, Rabbit and Impreza, for their noise (tires and engine, respectively). They could make theri comparos much easier on themselves by doing them this way: "How's it handle? Great? OK, it's our top car. Now we'll need to flip some coins to figure out how all the other cars rank." ;)
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    "That's why I'm really hoping that the Corolla gets the 3ZR-FAE Valvematic engine within the next 18 months mated to a 5AT transmission along with standard four-wheel disc brakes on their top-line model."

    I wouldn't hold my breath for this one. It seems clear to me that Toyota is going to treat the Corolla as the el cheapo model in the Toyota lineup, giving it just enough not to be totally noncompetitive, and no more, even as they pile on the rebates and shoot for maximum sales volume.

    And honestly I don't think sales will drop much under this philosophy. This is really the fault of consumers - I think these days customers expect too little of Corolla; as long as it has the Toyota name, is nice and cheap, and they can get moderately comfortable in it, they look no further.

    There is a reason that C&D's two top picks, Rabbit and Impreza, struggle to sell what, 20K per year?

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • cz75cz75 Member Posts: 210
    It isn't a competitor to the Si by virtue of Toyota's retrograde engineering, offering less power than the last XRS, but it most certainly is Toyota's "sport" model compact sedan and not a stand-in for a Camry for those on a budget. It is certainly in the same price structure as an Si or a Mazda3S GT, with the latter being the vehicle that is most closely a match for the Corolla XRS, which offers far less content for the money than the Mazda.
    Car and Driver Short Article
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    I wouldn't hold my breath for this one. It seems clear to me that Toyota is going to treat the Corolla as the el cheapo model in the Toyota lineup, giving it just enough not to be totally noncompetitive, and no more, even as they pile on the rebates and shoot for maximum sales volume.

    I think that will start to hurt the Corolla's reputation for the new model, because let's face it: with the high price of motor fuel nowadays, American car buyers are getting into smaller cars and demanding more from a smaller car. (Why do you think the upcoming 2009 Honda Fit has a satellite navigation option?) As such, the Toyota Corolla needs to be more than just "basic transportation," something that is now filled by the Yaris entry model. That's why Toyota needs to upgrade their drivetrain to one powered by the 3ZR-FAE 2.0-liter I-4 Valvematic engine with the 5AT transmission currently used and maybe have Toyota Racing Development (TRD) develop a more proper "sporting" suspension.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    I think they will up the availability of the gew-gaws (NAV, HID, leather, keyless start) before they up-tech the engine.

    It COULD be that we are on the verge of spiking compact car sales at the expense of the larger models, because of the gas prices. And IF that's the case, the folks downsizing could want more of the same features they are familiar with from their bigger cars, and I am sure Toyota will be only too happy to follow that gravy train. But spend money under the hood? I would be very surprised. Toyota knows Americans will settle for less.

    Corolla IS cruising for a bruising if they continue to follow this philosophy through another model update. It is very similar to what happened when the Americans let the Japanese have the market for cars (not trucks) beginning in the 80s.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    It's you and C&D that are trying to force a comparo between unequals. There is no comparo. The sporty Si and others are far more fun to drive. No question. The Corolla will make more money. No question. End of comparo.

    It only comes down to money. It's a business nothing more. It's not a beauty pagaent. The XRS is an ultra small volume trim in what is essentially a very very basic commuter / people mover. It's also no competition to the IS nor the 3-series or any other sport model just to complete the picture. Wasting more than a passing thought on it is a gross waste of time...and paper, in the case of the C&D article.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Actually I think Americans 'demand' less in their economy vehicles. This very same discussion is being held all over the GM boards and the Ford boards; i.e. Why are the NA versions of the very very nice Euro vehicles so blah, basic and decontented?

    The simple answer is we in NA don't want our econo-boxes to have much content. Price if far far more important than either performance or content. We are much more willing to spend big bucks for midsized autos than for small autos. On the contrary in Europe and Japan they spend much more on their high volume small vehicles.

    If we want our econo-boxes to be $18000 -$20000 then we get a decontented model. If we want to spend $25000-$30000 for a Civic, Corola or Jetta then we will get more content.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    The simple answer is we in NA don't want our econo-boxes to have much content.

    Then why does Toyota put options like high-zoot stereos, Bluetooth, navigation, and leather on the Corollla?

    Personally I don't need any of that "content" in an economy car. What I want are basic things like a comfortable driving position, a nice-looking interior with quality surfaces and controls, a roomy back seat, a good blend of ride and handling, and as many safety features standard as possible, including ABS, side curtain airbags (with good crash test scores to boot), and ESC. And of course good fuel economy and reliability. The Corolla delivers on the last two very well (well, we'll see about reliabiilty but history is in its favor.) The others, not as well. How about more focus on the basics and less on the "flash"?
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Member Posts: 2,697
    Bluetooth is no big deal anymore and isn't very expensive if it's installed on the factory assembly line rather than added on later.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    If Bluetooth were so inexpensive to add on the assembly line, I expect we'd see most if not all economy cars, including the Corolla, offer it as a standard feature. Yet no cars in the economy car class offer it as a standard feature, and not all offer it as a factory option. Maybe because the automakers realize that buyers know there are less expensive ways to have a Bluetooth-enabled phone in a car than buying the factory Bluetooth option.

    As for me, I'd rather the automakers focus on features like comfortable/adjustable driver's seats, roomy back seats, and crisp handling rather than fancy electronics that I can get elsewhere, for less money.
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Member Posts: 2,697
    Bluetooth used to be only on the high-end expensive cell phones a few years ago and now it's on many of the phones the carriers give away free with contract.
    Automakers are just slow to adopt new things. It took years of customer pressure before GM finally relented and will start installing bluetooth on most of their vehicles next year instead of pointing to their fee-based OnStar service as the handsfree solution.

    Automakers were slow to adopt CD players, so people had get third party changers until factory installed CD players became common. Then aux audio inputs were the next thing and now bluetooth.

    There are still some new cars that don't even have an aux jack, but it has become expected at this point. Bluetooth will also be expected soon.
    .
    So what if it isn't "standard" on every car? The cheapest cars don't have a/c and cruise control standard, but it's an option. Cars as cheap as the Nissan Versa now offer factory bluetooth as an option.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Yes it does. But it doesn't offer an important safety feature, ESC, at all, and ABS is an option vs. standard.

    I think automakers have their priorities skewed. But maybe it's not their fault. If buyers keep demanding electronic gizmo features like Bluetooth more than they do safety features, nice seats and controls, modern suspensions and accurate steering, etc., then whose fault is it? Not the automakers I guess. So we can get Bluetooth on the Corolla, whoopty-doo, but we have to rest our elbows on hard plastic and fight to get a comfy driving position. :confuse:
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    In the paper this weekend, three different volume dealers have opened the floodgates.

    All '09 Corolla LE automatics, $1500 off MSRP (dealer discount) all in stock (about 70 cars between the 3).

    All '09 Corolla XRS automatic in stock, $2000 off MSRP.

    All '09 Corolla 5-speed base models in stock, MSRP $16,1, sale priced $14,448.

    No factory rebates so far, but you know those aren't far away, maybe a couple of months.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

Sign In or Register to comment.